High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/25383/2015dismissed

Krishan v. State Of Haryana

2016-01-29Mr. Justice Dr. Ravi Ranjan2 pages

Criminal Misc. No. M-25383 of 2015 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-25383 of 2015 Date of decision : January 29, 2016 Krishan ....Petitioner versus State of Haryana ....Respondent Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Fateh Deep Singh Present :

Mr. Sahil S. Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Munish Sharma, AAG, Haryana Mr. Jasmer S. Reora, Advocate, for the complainant Fateh Deep Singh, J. (Oral) Petitioner Krishan has sought regular bail in the present case. The allegations of the prosecution stems from the statement of complainant Umesh to the effect that on 27.2.2014, he along with his brother Durvesh were coming on vehicle bearing No. HR-30M-4477 and when they reached Rundhi Moore Deeghot where they stepped out from car, at that time three boys came on a motorcycle out of whom present petitioner who has been identified by the complainant and who after stopping Durvesh had an altercation at which juncture Krishan petitioner DALBIR SINGH TIWANA 2016.02.12 14:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.

Criminal Misc. No. M-25383 of 2015 -2took out a country made pistol and fired on the forehead of Durvesh leading to his instantaneous death.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended inter-alia by citing State of Kerala vs Raneef, (2011) 1 Supreme Court Cases 784 to hammer home the point that the petitioner is in custody for the last one year and ten months and the trial has not been concluded which is opposed by State counsel arguing that out of 22 witnesses, 13 witnesses have been examined.

Appreciating the arguments of the two sides, the very eye witness account given by the complainant and the fact that the main role of firing leading to instantaneous death of the deceased is attributed to the petitioner who has fired at the forehead of the deceased are matters which has a great bearing on petitioner's case. The mere fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last one year and ten months is no extenuating circumstance for the grant of bail together with heinousness of the offence disentitles him to any relief. The bail application as such stands dismissed. ( Fateh Deep Singh ) January 29, 2016 Judge 'tiwana'

DALBIR SINGH TIWANA 2016.02.12 14:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.